Open Records: Congratulations to Ontario!

Posted on Updated on

Congratulations to all Ontario residents who have lost family members to adoption: Adoption records opened in your province on June 1st!

But deep sympathy for those who are affected by vetoes that prevent them from obtaining the records that belong to them. Vetoes are based on fear and denial. I am not saying this in a derogatory way at all as I work in the mental health field, but vetoes are invariably filed by people who — instead of filing a veto — should actually see a counsellor, perhaps with family members, to help them deal with the issues that are causing them to feel they need “protecting” from other family members.

Adoptees often file vetoes to “protect” the people who adopted them from feeling “threatened.” A family counsellor could help the adoptive family to get over these feelings and fear and embrace the reunion experience. A registered clinical counsellor or family therapist could enable the adoptive parents to learn that the sales-pitch they were given by the adoption agency, of being “the only parents,” is not only impossible to guarantee, but also in most cases a fabrication (e.g., the original mother did NOT willingly abandon her baby and her motherhood and still feels love for her lost child, mother and child are still connected by a deep blood-bond and genealogy), and is false advertising of a promise that the adoptee has NO obligation to try to fulfill.

Natural parents can enlist the aid of of a family counsellor or marriage counsellor to help them break the news to a husband, wife, or children, that they have another son or daughter out there. This information will NOT destroy a marriage. But we as natural mothers were told that NO man would marry us if he found out about our “shame” (I was even told repeatedly by my mother that no man would marry a non-virgin!). After all, that is why our parents and the pressure of society incarcerated us into maternity “homes” — to hide our pregnancy from society and release us again as “born again virgins.” I know myself how hard it is to tell. My three younger children were only told about their eldest sibling about 5 months into our reunion — it took me that long to get the courage, and I still expected the worst. Our families rejected us when we got pregnant out of wedlock — so of course we expect the same reaction from our present families. But this fear is unfounded.

BUT did you know that natural mothers were NEVER promised confidentiality? The social workers, maternity prisons, and those who had power over us not only knew while they were stripping us of our rights to our child and many of our human rights, that not only did the adoptive parents receive copies of our records including our and our child’s full names, but also that records were NOT sealed upon the surrender of the child but upon the legal adoption court order being granted to the adoptive parents! The purpose of sealed records was NOT to protect us, but to protect the adoptive family *from* us. So do not let anyone lie to you about “birthmother confidentiality.” It is truly a myth.

“Secrecy in adoption probably has its roots in a desire to protect the child from interference from the biological parents and to hide the often illegitimate circumstances of the child’s origins.” – Ministry of Community and Social Services Report by the Committee on Record Disclosure to Adoptees (1976)

I admit, I have heard of one natural mother who was in favour of closed records. But the reason why was that she had also adopted and did not want her adopted children to find out that she was “on par with” their lowly slutty incubators (as she saw their natural parents as being). This is not the type of woman who needs protecting. What she needs is therapy.

So, good for you, Ontario, for opening your records. Next task: to eliminate the veto provisions.

“The legal system ordinarily makes no attempt to write out of existence, by sealing records or other such mechanisms, the various parental figures who walk out of their children’s lives, such as the divorced parent who relinquishes custody. It is only in regulating adoptive family — families formed in the absence of any blood link – that the government feels that it has to seal records as to figuratively destroy the existance of the famiy that is linked by blood.” (Yngvasson, p. 44).

As an addition, as with all my posts, I invite your feedback. If you have an interesting story or point of view regarding vetoes, please comment.

More information: Origins Canada page on Open Records In Ontario

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Open Records: Congratulations to Ontario!

    Unicorn said:
    June 4, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    My son has already applied for his info.

    I have been told that only the parents named on the original birth certificate will be allowed that information, so all mothers (depending on the veto) will be able to have the identifying information. However, I wonder if that will be the case for fathers.

    In Ontario, before 1980, it was the practise to omit the father’s name off the certificate if he was not married to the mother. It was done to coerce mothers to surrender using shame and guilt. Social workers would tell mothers that everyone would know that there was no father and therefore treat your child in a terrible way “and you wouldn’t want your child to suffer that, would you? We know nice *married* people who would spare your child that sort of abuse” (which would imply we would be abusing our children by our lack of a marriage certificate).

    To enforce that, older Ontario birth certificates don’t actually say “Father” – they say “Husband” so that unwed fathers could not sign as it would have been untrue.

    On a more positive note, my son and his father are reunited. If my son’s father’s name is not on my son’s obc because of this outdated rule, then my son’s father will sign the obc which will also please my son (handy that they live near each other).

    The Registrar General has told me that NO record shall be altered or amended, so we still can’t fix that omission that was forced upon us.

    The point is that many fathers who apply may find that they are not entitled to the identifying information as they were not allowed on the birth registration. The form for information specifically says “Identify if you are the father/other parent *named* on the original birth registration”. I think a lot of fathers are going to find out that they are not which probably means they will not be allowed any identifying information.

    I guess we will have to wait and see what happens on that one.

    moonglowcool said:
    June 4, 2009 at 3:05 pm

    not only did the adoptive parents receive copies of our records including our and our child’s full names, but also that records were NOT sealed upon the surrender of the child but upon the legal adoption court order being granted to the adoptive parents”

    I was told that the adoptive parents never received anything but were told I was a student. Also told they did not know what name was given to my daughter. This was in BC. I remember giving the social worker all the info about myself and my boyfriend and families.

    Lorraine Dusky said:
    June 5, 2009 at 1:00 am

    Great post, Ceder…

    but I wonder if you could find out if the 1,100 who filed non-disclosure vetoes are really split between adoptees and first mothers. What the Globe and Mail said was the the 2,500 preferences filed (that includes those allowing information to be released and those, I think, who wanted to note how they wished to be contacted) were pretty evenly split. I could not find the number for the split of the 1,100. Me Bad.. but if you could elucidate, I’d be much appreciated and would post at firstmotherforum.com

    lorraine

    Cedar said:
    June 5, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    Hi Lorraine! I have not explored the government website yet to find out what they are saying themselves, but the Toronto Star reports:

    “There are 250,000 adoptions registered in Ontario, dating back to 1921. So far, just 3,700 people have filed disclosure vetoes, to prevent any information from being given out. Another 1,200 have asked that they not be contacted, and a further 1,600 have included conditions, such as requesting contact be made through work and not at home.”

    http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/643324

    I will keep digging to see if I can find out the split between adoptees and natural parents.

    Cedar

    Cassi said:
    June 16, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    It is a great step but I want to see the day when the rights come without any “buts” involved. Until OBC’s are available without ANY restrictions by anyone, it will never be right or fair.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s